In about 40 days there will be a new database backed web site at NatureWell.com

The message boards that we love (like this) will be there.

I don't know if this one will survive or not. But in any event, if Phil doesn't want this motly crew, I'll gladly make a new board just for 'us' over there.

The new site will be natureWell.com

You might also want to buy some stock in LAJD - which is the OTC-BB company that is becomming NatureWell.com. I am its President.

I don't know if anyone is moderating this group or not. If so, please don't delete this post. I tried to post something similar a few weeks ago and the moderator(s), apparently thinking it some sort of stock-hype, deleted the post.

I have a confession to make, but will save that for tomorrow.

This is, without a doubt, the greatest internet group in the universe.

BTW, I am/was me@me.me Yes, it's Me.

-- Stephen C. Roberts, MD (rbtrout1@hotmail.com), March 08, 2000

Answers

This is from Yahoo

Company to Launch New Internet Health Portal at NatureWell.com

Feb. 29, 2000--La Jolla Diagnostics Inc. (OTCBB:LAJD - news), today announced plans to launch a major new internet health portal at www.NatureWell.com. Expected launch date is mid-April.

``We are bringing an entirely different kind of health portal to the internet.'' said Stephen Roberts, MD, President. ``Our goal is to empower groups and individuals by providing more than just basic information. We believe that at present there are better sites and tools for discussing stocks and sharing information on investments than there are for health concerns. We intend to change that. Not only will we offer the freedom and the means to achieve collaboration among users, but also a space that is 100% free of advertising. The place where people meet to learn about and discuss personal health issues should be considered sacred. We will never defile that space with ads. And of course we will never sell user data of any kind, to anyone, ever.''

Link To Full Article At Yahoo

Link To Stock Info On "LAJD" At Yahoo

Dr. Roberts,

Personally I love this forum and the Greenspun software that it runs on and I hope we all stay right here where we are.

I certainly agree with you though that this is "The Greatest Internet Group In The Universe"

I took the liberty of doing a little research on your company and I've included it in this thread for all the regulars.

It's probaly a smart move trying to hop onto the Dot Com bandwagon with your company but I'd hurry if I were you. I can hear a giant "hissing sound" coming from the direction of the Wall Street bubble.

All The Best,

-- Zdude (zdude777@hotmail.com), March 08, 2000.

I can hear it too,that glorious"hissing Sound",coming from the Boiler Room of the WallStreet Titanic.

-- Crash Baby,Crash (WallStreet@up.U lose), March 08, 2000.

Spam spam spam spam spam spam spam spam...

But not just ANY spam!

It's penny stock BB spam!

Gotta run, the FTC just LOVES this kinda crap!

-- Charles Underwood Farley (chuck@u.farley), March 08, 2000.

Charles, For heavens sake give the guy a break. I agree Stephen, these wonderful people who have now shifted this forum back from the other one, do us readers a great service. I have mentioned before; the regulars on this form do a better breaking news update than the Drudge Report. Long live the internet! All this goes to prove that the internet belongs to the people, and it's bigger than all of us. Charles, might I kindly suggest that you read one or two of James Redfield's books. You never know, you might even end up finding some links that are useful, including Stephen"s "natureWell.com".

Long live this forum Best wishes to all Pamela J Lawrence

-- Pamela J Lawrence (pamela01@tpg.com.au), March 08, 2000.

God bless us, every one.

-- Normally (Oxsys@aol.com), March 08, 2000.

Stephen, thanks for the post. I have bookmarked the future site on my favorites. This is one senior citizen that has good health and would like to keep it.

You are right about this being the best BB ever. So I plan to stay on this one, and when natureWell.com is up and running, I'll flitter back and forth between the two.

-- gilda (jess@listbot.com), March 08, 2000.

Pamela, are you aware that there are laws governing the promotion of stocks? ESPECIALLY by principals of the corporation?

Do you think there's a REASON for those laws?

Do you think there's a reason that you see phrases like, "This is not a prospectus", and "Request a prospectus" in press releases and the like?

Do you realize that the SEC (yeah, I said "FTC" by mistake above) is in the process of putting together a massive operation to deal with people who "promote" stocks via Internet fora?

Do you realize that...

I'll stop now, and venture a guess that the answer to all of the above would be "no".

-- Charles Underwood Farley (chuck@u.farley), March 08, 2000.

"You might also want to buy some stock in LAJD - which is the OTC-BB company that is becomming NatureWell.com. I am its President."

Charles, your point is well taken, but without knowing ISP numbers, we have no way to access whether this individual is, indeed, the president of said company. I'm sure that the SEC will become interested in this matter at a later time if this company gets off the ground.

You're also correct about the massive SEC investigation. I expect that the hissing sound that you hear from the direction of bubble.com will increase in volume over the next month.

-- (not@sysop.here), March 08, 2000.

If I wanted to 'hype' a stock, especially that for my own company, I would certainly have at least enough sense to do it anonymously.

My offer, and my opinion of this group, was/is legitimate.

If anyone can find 'hype' or 'insider information' or anything 'untrue' in my message, then by all means - contact the SEC at once. I've provided my real name, my real email, and of course the name of the company. It won't be hard for them to find me. The information, as was easily discovered, is public knowledge. A press release went out to the world. Ask yourself this - if I were simply to post the press release here - along with the comment "I will put a BB on the site if ever this group needs a home" would I have then committed a felony? Of course not. But you can get all lathered up about it if you want to. (And, if you think this is what the SEC is going after when they talk about "internet fraud" - well - let's just say your sensibilities may be a little too finely attuned.)

Anyway, go ahead, send this conversation to the SEC, FTC, Reuters and wherever else you feel like sending it.

Sheesh - now I remember why I spent all of last year posting anonymously. It is a great group - an outstanding group - but of course there are a few others in the group as well.

As one additional point, I thought that the people here would appreciate how well internet conversations on good software can be. But if you don't think that it will be possible to do as the press release suggested, namely promote health-related community on the internet, then by all means don't buy the stock. You may wish to consider shorting it. Perhaps the previous responses serve as an argument in favor of the position that unmoderated forums can never work effectively.

Well, I guess I learned my lesson.

Steve Roberts

PS - Information regarding 'the obtaining of a prospectus' is never attached to press releases dealing with stocks. Ads for mutual funds do contain such language, because each new purchaser is, in a sense, participating in a new offering - their money goes straight to the company.

-- Steve Roberts (rbtrout1@hotmail.com), March 08, 2000.

It's a question of ego. I too set up an alternate site last weekend (under a different handle). Luckily, this one gained traction.

I think pretending you're being altruistic when you're really flogging stock is what pisses people off.

You could have just said, hey, there's a new site opening in a few weeks that can host this board and signed your handle SCRMD, then nobody would have flamed you. But don't kid yourself, you were flogging stock too!

-- NotMy (NotMyReal@handle.com), March 08, 2000.

Sorry you thought I was 'flogging stock'.

The message was prompted by my going to the forum late last evening and finding the message - something like "this forum is now closed".

I was very unhappy to read that.

I probably should not post late at night in a sleep deprived state. It may have been poor judgment to mention the stock symbol. That, I will now admit - but clearly 'hyping', 'fraud' and such other descriptions do not apply - at least not in my opinion.

C'est la vie.

-- Steve Roberts (rbtrout1@hotmail.com), March 08, 2000.

I only used my real name and email once last year - because I felt I had to.

Here it is:

Is it too late for America to be warned and prepare? greenspun.com : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------

This evening I had the pleasure of dining with a former very high up gov't official. His position was/is such that he is frequently called to testify before congress, advises many foreign gov'ts, central bankers, etc., etc.

He initially and spontaneously expressed 'moderate' y2k concerns. Then I began 'blasting away' (in a very respectful way, of course) on certain y2k points, including certain information gleaned from the most recent "Weather Report", such as Joel Williamson's comments on the estimated cost of remediating the non-mission-critical federal systems, the implied status of the IRS and continuing uncertainty on FAA status. I added my concerns on the petroleum industry, health care and others. With this he acknowledged 'greater understanding'. He knows Joel Williamson and nodded in agreement as I ran through my litany of concerns.

So it turns out that he is actually somewhat of a 'doomer' (for lack of a better term). He provided some interesting information, including the fact that he believes a 20% VAT is 'ready' to go into effect when/if IRS fails and that the FAA systems cannot be fixed but that the current solution was a program layered on top of the old system to make it y2k compliant - a bandage that will not work long- term but may get us through the rollover (I don't know if this makes any sense). He also offered some first hand observations from South and Central America as follows, "Many countries have done nothing; they have not started yet."

We agreed that someone needs to warn the American public that this is going to be something more than a three day storm and that the current administration is 'misleading' people. We agreed that some credible figure needs to step forward to achieve this in a very public forum (e.g. television news conference). He said that he does not have sufficient credibility (name recognition) to do so, but knows certain senators who believe along with him that the U.S. should not go over the cliff at full throttle. I indicated to this person that I would be happy to meet with any such senators or other credible individuals who might be able and willing to sound an alarm. But what credibility do I have? (hint: none)

There has been speculation on why no programmers have come forward to reveal the truth if in fact the remediation is not going as well as publicly stated. The 'doomers' say this is for fear of repraisals, etc., while the 'pollies' say this is because no such individuals exist. I tend to believe that just as the y2k problem itself is so complex as to defy encapsulation in a sound bite, even when a company is failing miserably, the reasons for a programmer concluding this are not as straightforward as us non-technical types might believe or even be able to digest.

Nonetheless, if possible, I would like to identify several individuals who are willing to meet with and disclose to a certain public official substantial and, of course, accurate inside information that clearly demonstrates why the outcome from y2k will be more severe than the BITR/three day storm message suggests.

The reason such disclosures must be made is in order that the public official be given enough ammunition to go forward confidently. As you will understand, the individual who might do this would be taking an enormous risk and would immediately be attacked from many sides. Thus the need for solid, substantial and unimpeachable 'ammunition'.

If anyone is so willing, please email me with a very brief description of what information you possess and your position within the organization. At this point I do not want you to provide the name of your organization or company but rather the industry and size (e.g. top 10 int'l bank, top 5 oil firm, etc.) You need not even provide your name. Just make sure there is a valid email address at which you can be reached. Of course you may provide your name and phone number, which would make this task much easier for me. All correspondence will remain 100% confidential (and I am willing to sign any legal agreement to that effect if need be.)

If I receive a sufficient response, I will go forward in attempting to schedule a meeting with the public figure. Provided the public figure is willing to go forward to the American people, I will contact the respondents and organize further.

This may be a crazy idea. It probably has a low chance for success. And it begs the question of whether or not any warning, at this point in time, could really do any good.

I am doing this because I believe that this is a national crisis of immense proportions and because, despite all her corporate and individual flaws, I still love my country .

-- Steve Roberts (rbtrout1@hotmail.com), October 23, 1999

Answers

Steve, Alas, I fear that some of us have become so jaded and cynical at this point that we have to wonder whether you, too, are a troll. But assuming you're not, I have to agree with the overall theme of several others who have posted on this thread already: the bad news is out there, in the clear, direct from the Senate itself, not to mention the CIA and the State Department and as many credible authorities as anyone could reasonably ask for. It has not caused any significant reaction, and at this point, I think it's far too late to hope that one more bit of testimony will do the trick.

You may well get a lot of notes and comments from insiders who have some scary stories to tell -- I know that I have. But getting hard, tangible, incontrovertible "smoking gun" evidence is much, MUCH more difficult. And remember: such info would be coming from relatively low-level peons in the organization, and the companies they accuse would ramp up an enormous PR response, and then stonewall any inquiries. If the U.S. Senate has been unable to embarrass or humiliate 75% of the electric utilities into disclosing their status to NERC, I doubt that a whistle-blower is going to have much of a chance.

Meanwhile, all you have to do is look at the surveys that showed up yesterday about the status of chemical plants; take a look at the summary on Sanger's site at http://sangersreview.com if you haven't seen it already... if that's not enough to tighten up your sphincter muscles, I don't know what is...

It's reassuring to hear that there are at least a few senior officials in Washington who are concerned about the outcome of Y2K. Maybe they'll be there to pick up the pieces, and maybe they won't be tainted by the backlash.

For whatever it's worth, I'm sure you could collect a handful of us veteran IT people to help articulate the likely risks; people like Howard Rubin, Capers Jones, and Leon Kappelman come to mind, and there are probably a couple dozen others who would be happy to volunteer, including myself.

Good luck in your efforts.

Ed

-- Ed Yourdon (ed@yourdon.com), October 23, 1999.

---------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------

I really don't think you need to look much farther than the Senate themselves. They have already taken lots of testimony, have produced their 100 Day Report which is quite alarming and also produced a follow-up Oct 13 testimony and report. That, along with all the other significant data from good sources, should be enough. Senators Bennett and Dodd are high enough, are they not? But the message is still being suppressed by the mainstream media. And Koskinen is still down playing the whole event. Go figure!

I am going on a local radio station this next week for two, 1-hour shows to discuss this very issue and present much of this info. My message is simple - if, after reviewing the data, you see sufficient risk of problems ahead, then prepare. Once warned and presented the facts it is up to the individual families to act. They will have to live with the consequences if they do not prepare.

Charlie

-- Charlie Hicks (chicks@ix.netcom.com), October 23, 1999.

---------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------

Steve, yes, it is mind-boggling, but there seems to be a Stupidity Cloak over Y2K. When the curtain falls the scenes of mayhem will stun the audience. TPTB have helped weave snicker spin and ridicule scoff deeply into the Cloaking Curtain, and the Tapestry Travesty of Lies will become a burial shroud vestige. There is indeed a group that is developing contingency plans "outside the box."

Hints and clues of this throughout archives.

This won't be your grandfather's revolution.

-- Ashton & Leska in Cascadia (allaha@earthlink.net), October 23, 1999.

---------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------

Steve: Charlie's right...........Bennett and Dodd's committe has received the testimony and issued the report. The news media is used to them on the radar screen. The only person that the news media would listen to at this date is Clinton, and he would be committing political suicide to stand up and warn about anything. Good intentions, Steve, and best of luck in whatever you decide to do. At this point, just make sure your personal preps are in order

Charlie, best of luck on the talk radio. I've been on the air the last two Tuesday mornings in Memphis for the "Y2K Tuesday" segment offered by a local station, once as a guest and once as a caller. I was the "doomer". I said to prepare for at least two weeks, just in case Memphis Light Gas & Water or TVA missed something (both say they are ready). I cited the stats from Cap Gemini that only 56% of the surveyed companies expected to be finished and that Ed Yardeni continues to predict a 70% chance of recession. My point was that there is uncertainty and cause for concern. The good news is, not one caller called in to say I was crazy. The bad news is, I don't think anyone got the message.

Best of luck to everyone.

-- David (dwaldrip@aol.com), October 23, 1999.

---------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------

I wish I had info to give you. I'm afraid the news media is not into predicting bad news.--just reporting as it happens. (I personally believe news media get upset if a huracane doesn't hit well) My best advice--Do a paid advertisement during prime time (I know pricey). Hopefully if those who are trying to yell the loudest are willing to invest in such an advertisement to protect this nation from its own naiiveness to the subject of y2k. Isn't NBC doing a TV made movie. Maybe they might be interested to do a prelude to their movie? This is just my input, I hope it helps.

-- Ice (icemanltd@webtv.net), October 23, 1999.

---------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------

Steve, Best wishes for success in this effort. I hope you do receive more information though I'm concerned about timing. I wish I could help you in some way.

I'm with Ashton & Leska. We're getting close to zero hour and a critical point in time for hour country. Contingency plans "outside the box" seem all too possible.

Mike

=================================================================

-- Michael Taylor (mtdesign3@aol.com), October 23, 1999.

---------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------

Is it too late for America to be warned and prepare?

Yes. But it might not be too late for you to prepare.

69 days.

Y2K CANNOT BE FIXED!

-- Jack (jsprat@eld.~net), October 23, 1999.

---------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------

Steve, Just to eliminate any thoughts of you being a "troll", Are you the significant other of one Cokie Roberts? Might clear up the access question to a "high-level" government official.

Please read this Paula Gordon letter and ensuing thread with the Rep. Dennis Kucinich D-OH conversation -

Link

Your comments please...

Widespread preparations at this stage would look like panic.

-- PJC (paulchri@msn.com), October 23, 1999.

---------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------

I would have to agree that it is generally too late for America to get prepared and there is only time for individuals to make some preparations. The problem, as we all know, is that the truth has been told. Unfortunately, it has been completely surrounded on both sides with opinions that range from a "hoax" to "TEOTWAWKI." I have no doubts that after the rollover, the government will be able to look back, pull the appropriate statements out of the many hearing and opinions and say "There, we told you this would happen so its not our fault."

-- smfdoc (smfdoc@aol.com), October 23, 1999.

---------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------

Steve, I know you have a common name, but I have to ask: Are you Steve Roberts the journalist, husband of ABC's Cokie Roberts, son -in-law of the Ambassador to the Vatican, cousin of Rep. Barney Frank and his sister (former WH Comms Director) Anne Lewis?

I am just curious, but regardless of who you are, I applaud your efforts on behalf of our country.

Best of luck, and report back soon on your findings.

-- semper paratus (always@ready.now), October 23, 1999.

---------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------

Regarding the chances that Pres. Clinton might begin to level with the public at this late stage: politically, it would be tempting to blame most of the calamities on cyberterrorism. This strategy could be adopted by all those trying to avoid Y2K litigation, and might be hard to disprove. It could lower the chances of revolutionary activity, and might even get Gore elected. Since there probably will be some Y2K cyberterrorism, the public might buy the whole thing.

-- Bill Byars (billbyars@softwaresmith.com), October 23, 1999.

---------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------

At this point in time it does not matter who is at fault, what will matter is that people will be starving and depending on the government to save them. I believe this is a great calculated risk that the government is taking by not coming out and asking people to have food and water on hand just in case. The risk will be anarchy and total chaos and perhaps this is what TPTB wants. The message is out there no doubt, but what kind of message is it? The Bill Cosby Y2K Show the other night was a good example of the message the media is sending to the American people. Steve, your concern at this point really does not matter except to be prepared for yourself and family. With 60+ days to go, what could the media or any Senator say to the American people that would motivate them to prepare for even a 3-day emergency? The wheels are already set in motion and the ball is rolling down the hill, it's too late.

-- bardou (bardou@baloney.com), October 23, 1999.

---------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------

Cyber-terrorism; I am a little ISP in eastern Virginia. Sometimes I do security work for some of the other ISP's in the area. In every case where I have had an opportunity to work on another ISP's network, I have found serious compromises in one form or another. In studying those compromises and attempting to track down the people responsible, I have shown (to myself atleast) that about 70% of the networks involved have been compromised to the administrator level. I have requested the assistance of an agency (which will remain nameless) in one case and discovered that they "farmed out" their investigative chores to a contractor (who proved to be more interested in whether or not he was going to get called again, than the truth). The case was not solved. It is not appropriate to go into it in this forum so I won't and you shall have to decide for yourself whether or not you believe me. The bottom line turned out to be, "The bad guys have more expertise, time, and control of local ISP's in this area than the ISP's themselves AND the best law enforcement agencies you can call to get help are unable to do anything about it." Word. My feeling is that those "bad guys" have a vested interest in keeping the local systems running (money... scamming credit card data, etc.. etc...) and they will actually be an assett in the rough days ahead BUT the implication is that if it is that easy to seize control of large segments of the local wan structures. Any governmnet that wants to can (and conceivably) already has done that. What better way to move your secure communications than to mix them with a few thousand spam messages, for example? I think my server is secure...

-m-

-- Michael Erskine (osiris@urbanna.net), October 23, 1999.

---------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------

I am not a troll.

My wife is not famous except perhaps for her aol account, which I use from home. See "Genroberts" at CS-y2k.

-- Steve Roberts (rtrout1@hotmail.com), October 23, 1999.

---------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------

Here's a link to what I perceive as a preemptory SPIN in regards to who's to blame if the lights go out. Read the first article on the page and you'll see what I mean. F ederal Computer Week Article Hope this works..grin.

beej

-- beej (beej@ppbbs.com), October 23, 1999.

---------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------

That article is nothing but bullsh*t, blather, stupidity, and anyone like me for instance can see right through the stupdity of it. BARFO!

-- BARF (BARF@BARFFF.xcom), October 23, 1999.

---------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------

it's too late. someone else someplace else somewhen else (my memory wants it to be bonnie camp on the original euy2k.com open forum)said that the administration's strategy for y2k was set in stone many months ago and they couldn't change it now without disastrous consequences, even if they wanted to.

if any public figure with high visibility and public confidence went on tv tomorrow night and advised the country to prepare for two weeks of disruptions, there would be widespread and uncontrollable panic. all the disastrous consequences of y2k that have been predicted would come to pass: bank runs, food shortages, a stock market crash.

but if the current silence continues, the disastrous consequences of y2k will remain a 'maybe' unless something seriously and obviously breaks (with a respectful nod to mr. yourdon, who said something like this a few months ago).

so: to speak up and definitely cause a panic, or to keep quiet and hope there aren't any serious problems and therefore there isn't any panic?

i'd keep quiet. i hate to say it, but i do think that's the logical choice.

as always, this is just my two cents. it sounded real good in my head but something may have gotten lost on the way to my keyboard :<)

-- maggie huntone (mah1t1@provide.net), October 24, 1999.

-- Steve Roberts (rbtrout1@hotmail.com), March 08, 2000.

Will your web site have medicons?

-- ~***~ (~***~@earth.ebe), March 08, 2000.

Oh?

You weren't flogging the stock?

Exactly what the hell does the following mean, asshole?

"You might also want to buy some stock in LAJD - which is the OTC-BB company that is becomming NatureWell.com."

I was going to let it ride, but now I won't.

Enjoy your new relationship with the regulators, prick.

Oh, and your little stunt -- burying the thread by spamming in ANOTHER thread -- won't work. All it did was inspire me to start a new thread to make sure you're revealed for who/what you are, "Stephen C. Roberts, MD."

-- Charles Underwood Farley (chuck@u.farley), March 08, 2000.

I love this dorky forum, especially now that the y2k crap is over and especially now that everyone can post any opinion. One thing I wonder is who pays for it?

-- Lars (lars@indy.net), March 09, 2000.

Lars, MIT pays for it Tri-

-- Tri (tri@ngulate@my.position.com), March 10, 2000.